Randomized experiments in educational research

Handbook of Complementary Methods in Education Research

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 551-565

  Cook, Thomas D ^a   Sinha, Vandna ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85084547265     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203874769-38     Document Type: Chapter

References (32)

1. Agodini R., & Dynarski, M. (2004). Are experiments the only option? A look at dropout prevention programs. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 86, 180-194.
2. Angrist, J. D., Imbrens, G. W., & Rubin, D. B. (1996). Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91, 444-462.
3. Berman, P., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1977). Federal programs supporting educational change. Vol. 8: Factors affecting implementation and continuation. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
4. Bloom, H. S., Michaelopoulos, C., Hill, C. J., & Lei, Y. (2002). Can non-experimental comparison group methods match the findings from a random assignment evaluation of mandatory welfare-to-work programs? New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
5. Chelimski, E. (1987). The politics of program evaluation. In D. S. Cordray, H. S. Bloom, & R. J. Light (Eds.), Evaluation practice in review. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
6. Connell, D. B., Turner, R. R.. & Mason. (1985). Summary of findings of the school health education evaluation: Health promotion effectiveness, implementation and costs. Journal of School Health, 55, 316-321.
7. Cook, T. D. (2000). The false choice between theory-based evaluation and experimentation. New directions in evaluation: Challenges and opportunities. Program Theory Evaluation, 87, 27-34.
8. Cook, T. D. (2003). Why have educational evaluators chosen not to do randomized experiments? Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science, 589, 114-149.
9. Cook, T. D., Habib, F., Phillips, J., Settersten, R. A., Shagle, S. C., & Degirmencioglu, S. M.(1999). Comer’s school development program in Prince George's County, Maryland: A theory-based evaluation. American Educational Research Journal, 36, 543-597.
10. Cook, T. D., Means, B., Haertel, G. D., & Michalchik, V. (2003). The case for randomized experiments. In Haertel & Means (Eds.), Evaluating educational technology: Effective research designs for improving learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
11. Cook, T. D., Hunt, H. D., & Murphy, R. F. (2000). Comer's school development program in Chicago: A theory-based evaluation. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 535-597.
12. Cronbach, L. J., Ambron, S. R., Dornbusch, S. M., Hess, R. D., Homik, R. C., Phillips, D. C., Walker, D. F.,& Weiner, S. S. (1980). Toward reform ofprogram evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
13. Dynarski, M., & Gleason, P. (1998). What we have learned from evaluations offederal drop-out prevention programs. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Poliscy Research.
14. Dynarski, M., & Wood, R. (1997). Helping high-risk youths: Results from the alternative schools demonstration program. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research.
15. Finn, J. D., & Achilles, C. M. (1990). Answers and questions about class size: A statewide experiment. American Educational Research Journal, 27, 557-577.
16. Glazerman, S., Levy, D., & Meyers D. (2003). Why experiments matter: Nonexperimental versus experimental estimates of earnings impacts. The Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science, 589, 63-93.
17. Greene J. P., Peterson, P. E., Du J., Boeger L., & Frarier, C. L. (1996). The effectiveness of school choice in Milwaukee: A secondaiy analysis of data from the program’s evaluation. Houston. TX: University of Houston.
18. Howell, W. G.. & Peterson P. E. (2002). The education gap: Vouchers and urban schools. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
19. Kemple, J. J. (2001). Career academies: Impacts on students’ initial transitions to post-secondary education and employment. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
20. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21. Leviton, L. C., & Cook, T. D. (1983). Evaluation findings in education and social work textbooks. Evaluation Review, 7, 497-518.
22. Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (1993). The efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment: Confirmation from meta-analysis. American Psychologist, 48, 1181-1209.
23. Oxford English Dictionary Online. (1992). 2nd Ed. Retrieved January 30, 2006 from http://dictionary. oed.com/cgi/display/50080408?keytype=ref&ijkey=RB0HYWxhzJTEI
24. Rivlin, A. M., & Timpane M. M. (Eds.). (1975). Planned variation in education. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
25. Rouse C. E. (1998). Private school vouchers and student achievement: An evaluation of the Milwaukee parental choice program. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113, 553-602.
26. Smith M. L.. & Glass G. V. (1977). Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies. American Psychologist, 32. 752-760.
27. Stebbins, L. B.. St. Pierre R. G.. Proper, E. C., Anderson R. B.. & Cerba T. R. (1978). An evaluation of follow through. In T. D. Cook (Ed.). Evaluation studies review annual (Vol. 3. pp. 571-610). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
28. Weisner, T. (Ed.). (2005). Discovering successful pathways in children’s development: Mixed methods in the study of childhood and family life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
29. Weiss C. H. (1988). Evaluation for decisions: Is anybody there? Does anybody care? Evaluation Practice, 9, 5-20.
30. Weiss C. H.. & Bucuvalas, M. J. (1977).The challenge of social research to decision making. In C. H. Weiss (Ed.), Using social research in public policy making (pp. 213-234). Lexington. MA: Lexington.
31. Williams, T. M. (Ed.). (1986). The impact of television: A natural experiment in three communities. Orlando, FL: Academic.
32. Witte J. F. (1998). The Milwaukee voucher experiment. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 20, 229-251.